Baker Academic

Tuesday, November 4, 2014

The 153 Fish in John 21:11—Chris Keith

I've recently been doing some research on John 21 for my next book, as well as for my SBL presentation in November. One of the enduring curiosities of that chapter (one among many enduring curiosities of that chapter) is that the author states that the disciples' big haul of fish consisted of exactly 153 fish in John 21:11. There are numerous places in the Bible that are simultaneously interesting and unclear, a combination that inevitably leads to some really intriguing interpretations. John 21:11 has to rank up there with the best of them. Augustine saw 153 as a triangular number, reducible to 17 (Wikipedia is actually helpful here), and 17 as the sum of 10 (representing the law) and 7 (representing the Holy Spirit) (Comm. Jo. 72.8). Jerome observed that a Greek zoologist had counted that there were 153 different types of fish (Comm. Ez. 47.6-12). The great Raymond Brown considered a number of interpretations and threw up the white flag: "One cannot deny that some of these interpretations (they are not mutually exclusive) are possible, but they all encounter the same objection: we have no evidence that any such complicated understating of 153 would have been intelligible to John's readers" (Gospel according to John XIII-XXI, 1075). Interestingly, he proposes that, like the details in 19:35 and 20:7, the exact number is intended to give the impression that the Beloved Disciple is reporting the exact number of fish caught. (He hastens to add: "By way of caution we should note in conclusion that the explanation we have offered of the number's origin is not a solution to the problem of historicity" [1076]). In a 2002 Neotestamentica article later republished in The Testimony of the Beloved Disciple (2007, Baker Academic), Bauckham takes us back to a numerical solution to the numerical problem. Following M. J. J. Menken's 1985 dissertation published by Brill in NovTSup, concerning which Bauckham says, "I have seen no reference to it in any work of Johannine scholarship" (Testimony, 275n.15), Bauckham notes a number of supposed instances of numerical composition in GJohn. For example, he argues that the Johannine prologue contains 496 syllables and the Johannine epilogue contains 496 words (Testimony, 277). 496 is not only a triangular number, but also the numerical value of "only begotten" in Greek (John 1:18; cf. also 3:16). On this basis, Bauckham then proposes that the presence of 153 is another instance of gematria, as 153 is the numerical value of the Hebrew for "sons of God," a phrase that appears in Greek in 1:12 and 11:52 (NB: inarthrous in the former, arthrous in the latter). Thus, gematria in the prologue parallels gematria in the epilogue, and Bauckham makes this one plank in an argument for the originality of John 21 to GJohn.

What to make of this solution for the 153 fish? Honestly, I have no idea. And I should be upfront about the fact that I don't have a better solution. Further, it's abundantly clear that gematria was important for early Christians as well as the Fathers in their interpretations of Scripture. For the life of me, though, I can't get my skeptical eyebrow to come back down when I'm reading this type of thing.

**UPDATE: Thanks to Mikeal Parsons for pointing out his article on early Christian numerological exegesis ("Exegesis 'By the Numbers': Numerology and the New Testament," PRSt 35 [2008]: 25-43), wherein he addresses this and other issues. Building upon Augustine's observation of 153 as a triangular number reducing to 17, he suggests that 17, being one "under" 18, indicates that the created order is "under" Jesus since 18 is the value of iota-eta, the first two letters of "Jesus." (That 18 had special value for Christians for specifically this reason is clear in Barn. 9.7-9.) That is, Parsons suggests the numerology expresses the theology present elsewhere in, e.g., Col. 1.16-17.

I haven't responded, Jack, because I don't know. I know there were those who gave an inordinate amount of attention to syllables and their proper construction/design but I'm not sure if this ever fed into gematria.

This proving that Jesus spoke English and that Mel Gibson (as usual) was wrong.

Maybe you'd prefer Hebrew Gematria? OK. How about בצלאל? He's the guy who built the ark of the covenant (Exodus 31), and his name translates to "in the protection of God." Ergo, the fish represent Jesus' commitment to the old covenant. Or, his establishment of a new covenant. One of those things, it doesn't really matter which.

Of course, if the fish weren't fresh, there's also צחנה. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4jjrfZwFl_U.

Re James McGrath's comment, this from David James Duncan's remarkable novel, The River Why: "The adoration of statistics is a trait so deeply embedded in their nature that even those rarefied anglers the disciples of Jesus couldn't resist backing their yarns with arithmetic: When the resurrected Christ appears on the morning shore of the Sea of Galilee and directs his forlorn and skunked disciples to the famous catch of John 21, we learn that the net contained not 'a boatload' of fish, nor 'about a hundred and a half,' nor 'over a gross,' but precisely 'an hundred and fifty and three.' This is, it seems to me, one of the most remarkable statistics ever computed. Consider the circumstances: this is after the Crucifixion and the Resurrection; Jesus is standing on the beach newly risen from the dead, and it is only the third time the disciples have seen him since the nightmare of Calvary. And yet we learn that in the net there were 'great fishes' numbering precisely 'and hundred and fifty and three.' How was this digit discovered? Mustn't it have happened thus: upon hauling the net to shore, the disciples squatted down by that immense, writhing fish pile and started tossing them into a second pile, painstakingly counting 'one, two, three, four, five, six, seven . . .' all the way up to an hundred and fifty and three, while the newly risen Lord of Creation, the Sustainer of their beings, He who died for them and for Whom they would gladly die, stood waiting, ignored, till the heap of fish was quantified. Such is the fisherman's compulsion toward rudimentary mathematics!" (pp. 14-15)

Re Robert Hull comment, I think that apologetic cannot be so easily put to bed. Disciples may have counted fishes while sailing to the land (John, 21:8). We could assume that they may have picked up fishes from the net with both hands, to put them in baskets: two-by-two can be easily counted, and one person can probably move about two fishes per second into the baskets. This would take less than a minute-and-half for a single person to move/count them all: since we know that there were many disciples on the boat, the time needed to count all fishes is negligible - and even if "they were not far from the land", the task could be easily completed before landing.. :-)So said, I think we probably struggle too much to find meaning everywhere, while in a different context (songs, novels, etc.) we wouldn't probably have cared so much - like for the Fifteen Men on the dead man's chest, the 99 Luftballons of Nena or the 101 Dalmatians.

One does have to understand that Duncan's comments were made with his tongue planted firmly in his cheek. His novel is about "fishing" in the same sense that Robert Pirsig's Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance is about "motorcycles." Although Duncan has a lot to say about religion, his comments are generally dismissive, sometimes even mocking, especially of biblical literarism and fundamentalist Christianity.

I agree. Many is the time I've sat in a boat with my Grandfather or Father, heading back to land and tossing fish from one container to another to count and brag. The bigger the catch the more impulse to count them.

Thanks Robert. I think I understood the sarcastic/ironic tone of Duncan, that’s exactly why I presented a theoretical “historical” scenario (apologetic/fundamentalist) that is invulnerable to his sarcasm, for the disciples (according to Gospel’s account) may not have had to choose between counting fishes and/or revere the risen Christ as Duncan provocatively suggests… In the Gospel’s account the disciples had all the time to immediately count fishes (as any fisherman would do, thanks BarabbasFreed!) and to eventually revere their Lord once landed (as any disciple would do!). I fully share Duncan’s skepticism regarding the historical ground of such episode, but I think he didn’t read the Gospel account very well so his argument against literalism in this case is weak and his irony not fully justified.. :-)

I would propose that the most direct derivation of 153 comes from basic Biblical numerology: "3" signifies God and the spiritual realm, "12" signifies God's chosen people. The square of 3 plus the square of 12 = 153. Thus the number symbolizes God in union with all those redeemed in the act of salvation. Reference Rev 7:4 for another example of the square of 12 being used to signify all of those saved.

Thanks for this, Chris. Not so much the 153 fish, but the subject of numerical composition techniques is of very great interest to me. A couple comments, though: the count of 496 syllables is for the prologue, while the count of 496 words is for Bauckham's epilogue - which he defines as 21:1-23, framed by 20:30-31 and 21-24-25, both composed of 43 words. It's also worth noting that in addition to being the numeric value of MONOGENHS, the number 496 is also the third perfect number (such numbers being few and far between.) See http://www.openisbn.com/preview/080103485X/, for preview of ch.13 of Bauckham's book, search for 496.

I've assumed for some time that this is a reference to the number of occurrences of the Tetragrammaton in the book of Genesis. (See the entry for "Tetragrammaton" in the 1907 Jewish Encyclopedia for the count: http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/14346-tetragrammaton).

On the Dead Sea Scrolls Enoch solar calendar Christmas Day is on the 7th day of the 10th month.The average human gestation period is 277 days.

277 days from a conception on Christmas Day, brings you to the birth of Christ on The Day of Atonement – day 10 of month 7 !

They knew there was Something Special about Christmas Day !

( According to one researcher Christmas Day was never the winter solstice when the Julian calendar was first formulated, as so often asserted without any proof ! )

The Dead Sea Scrolls calendar allows us to finally identify the Temple Sadducee omer day starting their Feast of Weeks – the 19th Abib ! ( The Dead Sea Scrolls show that the Qumran community had this day one week later, on the 26th Abib.)

When using this Temple Sadducee 19th Abib omer, amazing numerical patterns show up between the Feast of Weeks 49 day count and their corresponding day dates !

Aside from that, amongst many other interesting features on this calendar: if you count starting from Christmas Day, 153 days forwards falls on the Temple Sadducee Day of Pentecost ! ! !

For much more see: http://www.declarethedecree.com/SOMETHING SPECIAL.xls

...a weblog dedicated to historical Jesus research and New Testament studies

__

Search This Blog

_______

Le Donne, Keith, Pitre, Crossley, Jacobi, Rodríguez

James Crossley (PhD, Nottingham) is Professor of Bible, Society, and Politics at St. Mary's University, Twickenham, London. In addition to most things historical Jesus, his interests typically concern Jewish law and the Gospels, the social history of biblical scholarship, and the reception of the Bible in contemporary politics and culture. He is co-executive editor of the Journal for the Study of the Historical Jesus.

Christine Jacobi studied protestant theology and art history in Berlin and Heidelberg. She is research associate at the chair of exegesis and theology of the New Testament and apocryphal writings. She completed her dissertation at the Humboldt-University of Berlin in 2014. She is the author of Jesusüberlieferung bei Paulus? Analogien zwischen den echten Paulusbriefen und den synoptischen Evangelien (BZNW 213), Berlin: de Gruyter 2015. Christine Jacobi is a member of the „August-Boeckh-Antikezentrum“ and the „Berliner Arbeitskreis für koptisch-gnostische Schriften“.

Chris Keith (PhD, Edinburgh) is Professor of New Testament and Early Christianity and Director of the Centre for the Social-Scientific Study of the Bible at St. Mary’s University, Twickenham, London.

Anthony Le Donne (PhD, Durham) is Associate Professor of New Testament at United Theological Seminary. He is the author/editor of seven books. He is the co-founder of the Jewish-Christian Dialogue and Sacred Texts Consultation and the co-executive editor of the Journal for the Study of the Historical Jesus.

Brant Pitre (PhD, University of Notre Dame) is Professor of Sacred Scripture at Notre Dame Seminary in New Orleans. Among other works, he is the author of Jesus, the Tribulation, and the End of the Exile (Mohr-Siebeck/Baker Academic, 2005), and Jesus and the Last Supper (Eerdmans, 2015). He is particularly interested in the relationship between Jesus, Second Temple Judaism, and Christian origins.

Rafael Rodríguez (PhD, Sheffield) is Professor of New Testament at Johnson University. He has published a number of books and essays on social memory theory, oral tradition, the Jesus tradition, and the historical Jesus, as well as on Paul and Pauline tradition. He also serves as co-chair of the Bible in Ancient and Modern Media section of the Society of Biblical Literature.

Books by the Jesus Bloggers

To purchase, follow these links

___

Jesus and the Last Supper

_____

Structuring Early Christian Memory: Jesus in Tradition, Performance and Text